🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.

In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

Pressure Building on Europe

Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.

The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism

However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.

Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations

This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.

However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018

All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.

Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.

It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.